I'd like to share a few thoughts about the Pepsi Refresh case. The purpose of this case is to assess the success of digital marketing campaigns, and also to illustrate the concept of authenticity.
Hopefully, at this point in time, you have had a chance to do the reading and have a look at the Pepsi Refresh commercial linked on the course page. Let me provide a bit more background to this case. The Pepsi Refresh project was launched in January, 2010. At that point in time, Pepsi decided-- made a strategic decision-- to take the budget that it typically uses for its annual advertisement-- the Super Bowl is in late January, early February every year-- and took that $1.3 million dollars, and instead of running an ad, like it usually does, to take this money and devote to fun, social causes. To do this, it created a new website called refresheverything.com, in which anyone in the world could submit a proposal for a social project such as sending care packages to soldiers overseas, or building a new playground for children. These proposals were voted on by visitors to the website, and based on these votes, Pepsi picked winning submissions every month. This website received lots of traffic within the first month, 1,000 submissions, and in total, by the time this promotion ended, the website had over 18 million unique visitors, 80 million votes, and generated nearly 150,000 Tweets. Which brings us to the core issue in this case. This project has received lots of submissions and has helped fund a number of worthwhile social initiatives. That's good stuff. The core issue is, how has this promotional campaign benefitted the Pepsi brand itself? So, I'd like you to focus on three particular questions.
First of all, what should be the criteria to evaluate a digital marketing promotional campaign such as Pepsi Refresh?
Second, was the Pepsi Refresh successful?
Why, or why not?
And finally, what should Pepsi do about this project?
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий